nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Japanese government dangles financial carrot to persuade reluctant communities to take nuclear wastess

But there is no prospect for the establishment of such a recycling system which would allow for disposing only of the waste from reprocessing and recycling.

Eventually, Japan, like most other countries with nuclear power plants, will be forced to map out plans for “direct disposal,” or disposing of spent fuel from nuclear reactors in underground repositories.

Hokkaido Governor Suzuki has taken a dim view of the financial incentive offered to encourage local governments to apply for the first stage of the selection process, criticizing the proposed subsidies as “a wad of cash used as a powerful carrot.”

 

September 22, 2020 Posted by | Japan, politics, reprocessing, wastes | Leave a comment

USA.Federal Bill to promote nuclear waste borehole system, and the dubious plan for reprocessing

September 22, 2020 Posted by | politics, reprocessing | Leave a comment

Extinction Rebellion exposes Zion Lights as yet another nuclear propaganda front


Extinction rebellion 16th Sept 2020, There have been a number of stories in the press in the last few weeks with criticisms about Extinction Rebellion by Zion Lights, UK director of the pro-nuclear lobby group Environmental Progress. It appears that Lights is engaged in a deliberate PR campaign to discredit Extinction Rebellion.
For any editors who might be considering platforming Lights, we would like to make you aware of some information about the organisation she works for and her employer, Michael Shellenberger. Environmental Progress is a pro-nuclear energy lobby group. While the group itself was only established in 2016, its backers and affiliates have a long and well-documented history of denying human-caused climate change and/or attempting to delay action on the climate crisis.
A quick look at groups currently promoting Zion Lights through their social media channels include climate deniers and industry
lobbyists such as The Global Warming Policy Foundation and the Genetic Literacy Project (formally funded by Monsanto). The founder of Environmental Progress, Michael Shellenberger, has a record of spreading misinformation around climate change and using marketing techniques to distort the narrative around climate science. He has a reputation for downplaying the severity of the climate crisis and promoting aggressive economic growth and green technocapitalist solutions.

https://extinctionrebellion.uk/2020/09/16/statement-on-zion-lights-michael-shellenberger-and-the-breakthrough-institute/

September 21, 2020 Posted by | technology, UK | Leave a comment

Utah lawmakers seek details on planned nuclear plant in Idaho

Utah lawmakers seek details on planned nuclear plant in Idaho, Next generation technology on board in 2029? Deseret, 

By Amy Joi O’Donoghue@Amyjoi16  Sep 19, 2020,  SALT LAKE CITY — As the next station approaches for cities and special service districts to potentially disembark from additional financial investment in next-generation nuclear technology, Utah lawmakers are seeking more details on NuScale Power’s Small Modular Reactor plant……..
The Public Utilities, Energy and Transportation committee on Wednesday heard an update on the Carbon Free Power Project that is being pursued by the U.S. Department of Energy and the Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems — a political subdivision of the state of Utah representing 47 cities or special service districts that provide energy.

Cities and districts invested in the plant have until Oct. 31 — one of several so-called off-ramps — to bow out of the project.

During the committee hearing, Sen. Ron Winterton, R-Roosevelt, shared his concerns over the cities’ financial commitments.

“I want to feel warm and fuzzy” he said, but questioned the technology and potential risks…….

Under both the Obama and the Trump administrations, the NuScale project has received strong financial support, Squires said. The federal energy agency gave NuScale a competitive award of $226 million in 2013 to develop the technology. Two years later, the federal agency gave NuScale $16.7 million for licensing preparation. …….

Critics like the Utah Taxpayers Association, however, say the investment by Utah cities is too risky and they should not be acting as seed investors.

“We are not opposed to nuclear power, we are opposed to the financial risk,” said the association’s vice president, Rusty Cannon. ……….. https://www.deseret.com/utah/2020/9/19/21438026/news-nuclear-plant-in-idaho-lawmakers-seek-details-on-planned-nuscale-uamps

September 21, 2020 Posted by | politics, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | Leave a comment

NuScam’s ”small” nuclear reactor design approved – but cost, safety, public acceptance hurdles loom against them

First U.S. Small Nuclear Reactor Design Is Approved, Concerns about costs and safety remain, however, Scientific American By Dave Levitan on September 9, 2020   

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has approved the design of a new kind of reactor, known as a small modular reactor (SMR). The design, from the Portland, Ore.–based company NuScale Power, is intended to speed construction, lower cost and improve safety over traditional nuclear reactors…………
    some experts have expressed concerns over the potential expense and remaining safety issues that the industry would have to address before any such reactors are actually built.  ………
    The NRC’s design  and related final safety evaluation report (FSER) do not mean that the firm can begin constructing reactors. But utility companies can now apply to the NRC to build and operate NuScale’s design. With almost no new nuclear construction completed in the U.S. over the past three decades, SMRs could help reinvigorate a flagging industry.

NuScale’s SMR, developed with the help of almost $300 million from the U.S. Department of Energy, has a generating capacity of 50 megawatts—substantially smaller than standard nuclear reactors, which can range to well more than 1,000 megawatts (MW). A utility could combine up to 12 SMRs at a single site, producing 600 MW of electricity—enough to power a midsize city. The NRC says it expects an application for a 60-MW version of NuScale’s SMR in 2022……….

Opponents have cited the unresolved issue of disposing nuclear waste, as well as the significant price tag and time involved in building any nuclear plant, compared with renewable energy sources.
NuScale believes it can avoid the dramatic cost overruns and years-long delays that have plagued construction of traditional nuclear power plants in recent decades. Diane Hughes, the company’s vice president of marketing and communications, says that the company expects to sell anywhere from 674 to 1,682 reactors between 2023 and 2042. ……
NuScale has signed memorandums of understanding with companies and utilities in the U.S., Canada, Jordan, Romania, Ukraine and other countries. The agreements simply mean the parties will jointly explore potential deals. 
NuScale’s first scheduled project is with Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS), a state-based organization that supplies wholesale electricity to small, community-owned utilities in surrounding states. NuScale plans to deliver its first reactor to the UAMPS project at the Idaho National Laboratory by 2027; it is scheduled to be operational by 2029. Another 11 reactors will round out the 720-MW project by 2030. A portion of the generated power will be sold to the U.S. Department of Energy, with the rest purchased by UAMPS member utilities. Agreements for some of the power are in place, although a few municipalities have already walked away because of price concerns. Others have until September 30 to exit the project.
Experts have expressed skepticism about both the safety of the NuScale SMR and its potential costs. In an online press event on September 2, M. V. Ramana, a professor and nuclear expert at the University of British Columbia, discussed a report he prepared at the request of Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility that highlighted significant issues associated with the UAMPS project.
“I am sorry to say that what lies ahead is risky and expensive,” Ramana said. Just in the past five years, he noted, cost estimates from various sources for the UAMPS project have risen from approximately $3 billion to more than $6 billion. NuScale’s initial goal of having operational reactors by 2016 has been extended by more than a decade, reflecting the sluggish U.S. nuclear industry in general. Costs to consumers could far exceed those associated with other emissions-free power sources such as solar and wind, Ramana added.
And despite the NRC’s design approval of the new SMR, some safety features still require adjustment. “I don’t think future NuScale applicants will benefit from a design certification that has safety gaps in it,” says Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists. He points out that the NRC has issued its final safety report in spite of questions raised both by an expert at the agency and an external advisory board.

In a July 2020 report, NRC nuclear engineer Shanlai Lu discussed a complicated issue known as boron dilution, which could possibly cause “fuel failure and prompt criticality condition”—meaning that even if a reactor is shut down, fission reactions could restart and begin a dangerous power increase. And in another report, the NRC’s Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards also noted that “several potentially risk-significant items” are not yet completed, though it did still recommend that the NRC issue the FSER. The agency’s response to the latter report stated that those items will be further assessed when site-specific licensing applications—the step needed to actually begin building and operating a reactor—are submitted. ……..

Lyman says that in general, the NRC’s design certification process should reduce uncertainty for utilities aiming to build nuclear plants because they can reference a completed safety review. But he thinks the NuScale approval undermines that advantage. Whether the gaps in safety will result in further delays to NuScale’s time line remains to be seen. The NRC will undertake another review when the company’s 60-MW design is submitted.  https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/first-u-s-small-nuclear-reactor-design-is-approved/

September 10, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, USA | Leave a comment

Bill Gates and nuclear bigwigs-a conglomerate of propaganda for Small Nuclear Reactors

 

 

September 5, 2020 Posted by | 2 WORLD, marketing, technology | 1 Comment

Fluor could improve its finances by abandoning NuScam, as some cities pull out of ”small” nuclear reactor scheme

Fluor could improve earnings by reducing underperforming assets, including NuScale
Some U.S. cities turn against first planned small-scale nuclear plant, WHTC, Wednesday, September 02, 2020 by Thomson Reuters, By Timothy Gardner and Nichola Groom,   (Reuters) – The first U.S. small-scale nuclear power project, grappling with cost overruns and delays, faces another challenge: the defection of cities that had committed to buying its power. The more than 30 members of the public power consortium Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS) have until Sept. 30 to decide whether to stick with the project and devote more funds to NuScale Power LLC’s first-of-a-kind reactor.

But two cities, Logan and Lehi, Utah have walked away from the project, and a third is now considering dropping its support because of risks and a lack of backers, according to officials.

Allen Johnson, the power department director for Bountiful, Utah, said chances are greater than 50-50 it will withdraw.

“You’ve got to have enough people to support it and some of the players I thought would be interested are not,” he said.

The defections are bad news for U.S. efforts to develop modular nuclear energy …

Combined, cities have so far committed to buying just under 200 megawatts of the plant’s planned 720 megawatts of power.

The U.S. Department of Energy has pumped more the $280 million into the project since 2013, and is expected to commit another $1.4 billion over the next nine years. The department did not respond to requests for comment…….

The consortium earlier this year pushed back the project’s commercial operation date to 2030 from 2026, Webb said, to provide more time for public input and opportunities for cities to reconsider their participation at various phases.

CITIES RETHINK COSTS

NuScale, based in Portland, Oregon, is majority owned by construction and engineering firm Fluor Corp.

The project would include 12 60-megawatt modules at the Energy Department’s Idaho National Laboratory.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission last week approved NuScale’s design, the first such green light for a modular reactor.

Small modular reactors are meant to be cheaper and quicker to build than traditional reactors because they can be manufactured in factories. But critics say economies of scale are lost with the smaller plants.

The NuScale project’s projected cost of $6.1 billion has risen from $3.6 billion in 2017, Mark Montgomery, head of the municipal utility in Logan told officials there last month ahead of their vote to abandon the project.

Lehi withdrew from the project due to a lack of interest from other entities and increased costs, according to the Aug. 25 resolution approved by its city council.

“These cities should not be acting as venture capital investors,” said Rusty Cannon, vice president of the Utah Taxpayers Association, which has been pushing cities to leave.

Previous cost estimates did not account for financing and decommissioning, as well as higher labor, construction and materials costs over ten years, UAMPS spokesman Webb said, explaining the change.

NuScale said the project delay had been requested by UAMPS. It did not comment specifically on the city defections.

A Wednesday report written by M.V. Ramana a professor of disarmament and human security at the University of British Columbia said Fluor had cut its own investment in the project and excluded NuScale expenses from its financial forecasts because it was expecting additional funding from third party investors.

Financial analyst Jamie Cook of Credit Suisse said last year that Fluor could improve earnings by reducing underperforming assets, including NuScale. ………https://whtc.com/news/articles/2020/sep/02/some-us-cities-turn-against-first-planned-small-scale-nuclear-plant/1054578/

September 3, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, USA | Leave a comment

Small nuclear reactors – NuScam looking dodgy as parent company Fluor shares sink?

Fluor Corporation stock has also loss -9.83% of its value over the past 7 days. However, FLR stock has declined by -15.01% in the 3 months of the year. Over the past six months meanwhile, it has lost -19.89% and lost -47.51% year-on date.   DBT News  25 August 20 

September 3, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, USA | Leave a comment

Small nuclear reactor NuScam’s parent company Fluor sued over allegations of insider trading and deception

Fluor Board Sued Over Insider Trading, Accounting Allegations,    Mike Leonard, Legal Reporter,     Aug. 14, 2020, COURT: Del. Ch., TRACK DOCKET: No. 2020-0655 (Bloomberg Law Subscription, JUDGE: J. Travis Laster (Bloomberg Law Subscription), COMPANY INFO: Fluor Corp. (Bloomberg Law Subscripti

The board of Fluor Corp., a leading engineering and construction conglomerate that does significant business with the federal government, has been hit with a Delaware lawsuit claiming several of its members sold stock at inflated prices while conspiring to mask the company’s deteriorating finances.

“At the same time,” Fluor’s board and top executives “engaged in a pattern” of having the company “repurchase its own shares at over-inflated prices,” the 98-page Chancery Court complaint says. “This repurchase of inflated stock cost the company over $1.6 billion.”

The heavily redacted derivative suit, made public Wednesday, comes about three months after Fluor……….(subscribers only) https://news.bloomberglaw.com/mergers-and-antitrust/fluor-board-sued-over-insider-trading-accounting-allegations

September 3, 2020 Posted by | Legal, secrets,lies and civil liberties, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, USA | Leave a comment

Small nuclear reactor NuScam’s parent company Fluor – shares tumble afterdisclosure of accounting probe

Fluor Shares Tumble After Disclosure of SEC Accounting Probe, Fluor shares are tumbling after the engineering company disclosed an SEC probe into its past accounting and financial reporting.   ROB LENIHAN, FEB 18, 2020

Fluor (FLR) – Get Report shares were tumbling after the engineering and construction company said the Securities and Exchange Commission is looking into the company’s past accounting and financial reporting.

The Irving, Texas, company also said in a statement that the SEC has asked for documents and information related to projects for which the Company recorded charges in the second quarter of 2019……. https://www.thestreet.com/investing/stocks/fluor-shares-tumble-after-engineering-company-discloses-sec-probe

September 3, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, USA | Leave a comment

Lehi City Council backs out of NuScam ‘small’ nuclear reactor project

Lehi City Council votes to back out of nuclear power project contract, Herald Extra,   By Connor Richards Daily Herald  26 Aug 20, 

The Lehi City Council voted unanimously Tuesday to withdraw the city from a multiagency nuclear power project that would provide nuclear power to cities across Utah, citing concerns over increasing costs.

The Carbon Free Power Project is an initiative by Oregon-based NuScale Power, the Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems and the United States Department of Energy to build a small modular reactor power plant at the Idaho National Laboratory………

Earlier this month, the Utah Taxpayer Association called on cities to withdraw from the project ahead of the Sept. 14 deadline after a closed-door virtual town hall meeting on July 21 where officials warned of project delays, increased costs to cities and towns involved, and “dependence on unpredictable federal subsidies.”

“The UAMPS project will lock in 27 municipalities in Utah and several in surrounding states for a share of billions of dollars in costs and unclear risk in the pursuit of a cluster of small modular reactors (SMRs) touted by Oregon-based NuScale Power, which repeatedly has delayed timelines and increased costs associated with its SMRs,” Utah Taxpayer Association Vice President Rusty Cannon said in an Aug. 4 news release. “The risky project with massive cost escalations is being conducted largely out of the public eye.”

Earlier this month, the Utah Taxpayer Association called on cities to withdraw from the project ahead of the Sept. 14 deadline after a closed-door virtual town hall meeting on July 21 where officials warned of project delays, increased costs to cities and towns involved, and “dependence on unpredictable federal subsidies.”

“The UAMPS project will lock in 27 municipalities in Utah and several in surrounding states for a share of billions of dollars in costs and unclear risk in the pursuit of a cluster of small modular reactors (SMRs) touted by Oregon-based NuScale Power, which repeatedly has delayed timelines and increased costs associated with its SMRs,” Utah Taxpayer Association Vice President Rusty Cannon said in an Aug. 4 news release. “The risky project with massive cost escalations is being conducted largely out of the public eye.”

In November 2017, the total cost of the project was estimated at $3.6 billion. By November 2019, that number had increased to $4.2 billion. By July, the estimated cost had gone up to $6.1 billion.

That would cost Lehi $466 million at the city’s current subscription levels, Eves said. UAMPS would be responsible for paying $4.8 billion, while the DOE would pay $1.3 billion and NuScale Power would pay $5 million.  …………  https://www.heraldextra.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/lehi-city-council-votes-to-back-out-of-nuclear-power-project-contract/article_0af6e67c-24e5-5427-9029-e52b9f9d63ae.html

August 27, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, politics, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, USA | Leave a comment

Two U.S.cities cut their losses, pullout of dodgy NuScam “small” nuclear reactor project

August 27, 2020 Posted by | Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, USA | Leave a comment

City in Northern Utah pulls out of NuScam small nuclear reactors project

Northern Utah city opts out of planned nuclear power project over money concerns     Deseret News, Amy Joi O’Donoghue @Amyjoi  16  Aug 24, 2020, 

SALT LAKE CITY — Cost concerns over Logan’s participation in a next-generation nuclear power plant planned at Idaho National Laboratory led the city to withdraw from the project, and Lehi is considering a similar move in its council meeting Tuesday.

“My concerns were many and varied,” Logan Finance Director Richard Anderson said of last week’s decision

…….  changes in funding by the U.S. Department of Energy for the Carbon Free Power Project caused Anderson concern, as it did for Mark Montgomery, the city’s light and power director, and prompted both of them to recommend Logan withdraw its participation.

“We don’t have the experience to be swimming in these waters. I didn’t feel good about it,” Anderson said.  

The city, as a member of the Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems, invested $400,000 and
was due to commit another $654,000 by Sept. 14 or vote to bow out altogether.
……..  The project is backed heavily by the U.S. Department of Energy, which gave NuScale a competitive award of $226 million in 2013 to develop the technology. Two years later, the federal agency gave NuScale $16.7 million for licensing preparation.

Ultimately, the energy department committed to spend $1.4 billion on the project with an eye toward reducing carbon emissions, combating climate change and to position the country as a world leader in nuclear technology.

But critics say the proposed 720-megawatt plant is too risky and ratepayers — hence taxpayers — should not be footing the cost for technology they say is yet to be proven.

LaVarr Webb, spokesman for the municipal power association, said the investment schedule was specifically designed with these exit opportunities if cities or special districts become nervous.

The project, he added, will not proceed if costs prove too high.

The project has also come under criticism for what some say is a lack of transparency.

Earlier this month, the Utah Taxpayers Association urged cities to withdraw ahead of the deadline and complained about meetings in which groups were turned away unless they were project participants.

Rusty Cannon, vice president of Utah Taxpayers Association, said because the municipal power association is exempt from Utah’s open meeting laws, it can close its doors to others.

“We asked to observe a recent meeting and were denied access. That is the same response many others have also received,” Cannon said.

While association leaders have spent hours on video calls with the association and others, Cannon said that format does not provide the same answers.

Webb said meetings in which non-project participants were turned away, with perhaps the exception of one, are in line with why other governmental entities can close meetings under Utah law, such as contractual issues, litigation or personnel issues.

On Tuesday in Lehi, the City Council will consider a resolution outlining the city’s withdrawal from the project…….   https://www.deseret.com/utah/2020/8/24/21399537/northern-utah-city-opts-out-of-planned-nuclear-power-project-over-money-concerns

August 25, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, USA | Leave a comment

Canada communities don’t want the so-called “clean” Small Modular Nuclear Reactors (SMRs)

even with SMRs under 300 megawatts, nuclear waste is a byproduct.

waste generated from SMRs would become a dangerous part of the transportation system “even if they do remove it.” 

“It will be big, big transports of highly radioactive stuff, driving down the roads as an easy dirty bomb

 the high cost of building infrastructure and then containing nuclear fallout and radiation are all concerns before they can go ahead. 

Nuclear giants team up to develop reactors in Sask. and Ontario, Michael Bramadat-Willcock / Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, National Observer, AUGUST 23, 2020 

Canada’s leading nuclear industry players announced an inter-provincial corporate partnership Thursday to support the launch of a research centre that will work on developing small modular reactors (SMRs) for use in Saskatchewan.

Saskatoon-based Cameco is the world’s biggest uranium producer and has long supplied fuel to Bruce Power, Ontario’s largest nuclear power company.SMRs are designed to produce smaller amounts of electricity, between 50 and 300 megawatts,……

This agreement comes on the heels of Saskatchewan announcing a nuclear secretariat to make way for reactors.

The secretariat is mandated to develop and execute a strategic plan for the use of “clean-energy small modular reactors” in the province. ……

No timeframe or SMR sites were included in the announcement, but the government’s plans already have some northern residents raising alarms.

Committee for Future Generations outreach co-ordinator Candyce Paul of La Plonge at the English River First Nation told Canada’s National Observer that they haven’t been consulted on any aspects of the plan, but all signs point to the north as a site for the reactors.

Paul’s group fights nuclear waste storage in Saskatchewan and was instrumental in stopping a proposal that considered Beauval, Pinehouse and Creighton as storage locations in 2011.

“When we informed the communities that they were looking at planning to bury nuclear waste up here in 2011, once they learned what that entailed, everybody said no way. Eighty per cent of the people in the north said no way, absolutely not. It didn’t matter if they worked for Cameco or the other mines. They said if it comes here, we will not support it coming here,” she said.

Paul said she sees small modular nuclear reactors as another threat to the environment and to human safety in the region.

She noted that even with SMRs under 300 megawatts, nuclear waste is a byproduct.

“Even if they’re not burying nuclear waste here, they could be leaving it on site or hauling it through our northern regions and across our waterways,” Paul said.

She said that waste generated from SMRs would become a dangerous part of the transportation system “even if they do remove it.”

“It will be big, big transports of highly radioactive stuff, driving down the roads as an easy dirty bomb. You’d be driving down the road (behind a nuclear waste transport vehicle) and not know you’re following it,” Paul said.

Paul said the intent behind installing SMRs is anything but green and that the real goal is to prop up Saskatchewan’s ailing uranium industry and develop oilsands in the northwest.

Paul said that communities around Canada, and especially in the Far North, have long been pitched as sites for SMR development and have refused.

A 2018 brief from Pangnirtung Hamlet Council in Nunavut concluded “any Arctic-based nuclear power source should be an alternative energy choice of last resort.”

“None of our people are going to get trained for operating these. It supports people from other places. It doesn’t really support us,” Paul said.

SMRs have been pitched in the north as a way to move away from reliance on diesel fuel, which can be costly. Paul said any benefits of that remain to be seen.

She said companies would need to do environmental impact assessments for smaller reactors even though the exclusion zone around SMR sites is smaller.

“Even if the exclusion zone is only a few kilometres, a few kilometres affects a lot in an ecosystem and especially in an ecosystem that is wild,” Paul said.

“I’m not feeling confident in this at all, Canadian nuclear laboratories saying that it would only be a small radius exclusion zone. Well that’s our territory. That’s our land, our waters, our wildlife.

“It’s not their backyard, so they couldn’t care less.”

Brooke Dobni, professor of strategy at the University of Saskatchewan’s Edwards School of Business, told Canada’s National Observer that any development of small reactors would take a long time.

“It could be a good thing, but on the other hand, it might have some pitfalls. Those talks take years,” Dobni said.

He said nuclear reactors face bigger challenges because of public concerns about the environment and that the high cost of building infrastructure and then containing nuclear fallout and radiation are all concerns before they can go ahead.

“Anything nuclear is 25 years out if you’re talking about small reactors, those kinds of things to power up the city,” Dobni said.

“That technology is a long ways away and a lot of it’s going to depend on public opinion.

The court for that is the court of public opinion, whether or not people want that in their own backyard, and that’s the whole issue anywhere in the world.”  https://www.humboldtjournal.ca/news/nuclear-giants-team-up-to-develop-reactors-in-sask-and-ontario-1.24191077

August 24, 2020 Posted by | Canada, opposition to nuclear, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | Leave a comment

Huge electricity transformer will land on a Gwynedd beach, headed for nuclear power project

Daily Post 22nd Aug 2020, A huge electricity transformer will land on a Gwynedd beach on its way to a
nuclear power station. The 128-tonne unit is being brought to North Wales
by barge and will be landed on the beach at Traeth y Graig Ddu (Black Rock
sands) at Morfa Bychan in Gwynedd. It will then be transferred onto a lorry
and taken by road to the National Grid site near the decommissioned nuclear
power station at Trawsfynydd. It had been planned to bring the barge into
Porthmadog harbour last April, but this was delayed by the coronavirus
pandemic. There had been concern the delivery would have badly disrupted
the harbour so, in a first for National Grid, the transformer is arriving
at the beach.

https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/huge-delivery-headed-nuclear-plant-18798277

August 23, 2020 Posted by | technology, UK | Leave a comment